Observations On Adjuvant Antihypertensive Effect Of Auricular Point Pressing With Bean For Patients Who Suffer From The Chronic Kidney Disease At 3?4 Stage And Hypertension At Grade-1?2

Purpose:We aim to observe the compliance and adjuvant antihypertensive effects of Auricular Point Pressing with Bean in on patients who suffer from the chronic kidney disease at 3~4 stage and hypertension at grade 1~2, so as to provide objective data for adjuvant therapy of reducing hypertension by using the method of Auricular Point Pressing with Bean.Method:According to the inclusion criteria for research subjects, we chose 60 patients who suffer from the hypertension at grade-1~2 and chronic kidney disease at 3~4 stage from the nephrology department of Affiliated Hospital of Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine. We divided them into experimental group and control group randomly with 30 ones for each group. Patients from both groups were required to take common antihypertensive drugs: 5 mg amlodipine per day for Grade-1 hypertensives; 10 mg amlodipine per day for Grade-2 hypertensives. Patients from the control group were required to use auricular cloth on the basis of taking common antihypertensive drugs, and we selected the seven most common decompression acupoints(heart, liver, kidney, Shenmen H 7, depressurization groove, sympathia, subcortex) according to the principle of acupoint selection and gave them psychological hint that the auricular cloth works without need of pressing. We used the Auricular Point Pressing with Semen Vaccariae seed on the basis of using common hypertensive drugs to cure patients in the experimental group and selected the same seven acupoints(heart, liver, kidney, Shenmen H 7, depressurization groove, sympathia, subcortex), and then observed their blood pressure changes before and after the treatment with the method of Auricular Point Pressing with Bean in 3 days, 10 days and 28 days respectively.Results:1. For patients of the experimental group, their average arterial pressure(3 days after treatment vs. before treatment: 108.88±11.69 vs 118.77±11.56), systolic pressure(3 days after treatment vs. before treatment: 150.87±11.99 vs 173.56±12.01) and diastolic pressure(3 days after treatment vs. before treatment: 88.16±10.07 vs 94.97±10.97) are reduced(P<0.05), and are different in statistics.For patients of the experimental group,,their average arterial pressure(10 days after treatment vs. before treatment: 104.83±11.27 vs118.77±11.56), systolic pressure(10 days after treatment vs. before treatment: 140.55±11.78 vs 173.56±12.01) and diastolic pressure(10 days after treatment vs. before treatment: 84.98±10.89 vs 94.97±10.97) are reduced(P<0.05), and are different in statistics.For patients of the experimental group, their average arterial pressure(28 days after treatment vs. before treatment: 100.98±12.12 vs 118.77±11.56) and systolic pressure(28 days after treatment vs. before treatment: 134.26±12.08 vs 173.56±12.01) are reduced(P<0.01), and are significantly different in statistics; their diastolic pressure(28 days after treatment vs. before treatment: 83.02.±10.76 vs 94.97±10.97) is reduced(P<0.05), and is different in statistics.The experimental group achieves the ideal effect of depressurization after 3 days of treatment, and the depressurizing range of systolic pressure is larger than that of diastolic pressure. Moreover, the blood pressure will remain at a fairly stable level within 28 days after treatment.2. Comparing the two groups in 3 days after treatment, the average arterial pressure(experimental group vs. control group: 108.88±11.69vs112.30±11.97) and systolic pressure(experimental group vs. control group: 150.87±11.99 vs 158.76±12.33) are reduced(P<0.05), and are different in statistics; the diastolic pressure(experimental group vs. control group: 88.16±10.07 vs 90.58±11.56) is not decreased significantly(P>0.05), and there is no difference in statistics.Comparing the two groups in 10 days after treatment, the average arterial pressure(experimental group vs. control group: 104.83±11.27 vs 108.54±11.56) and systolic pressure(experimental group vs. control group: 140.55±11.78 vs 149.09±12.18) are reduced significantly(P<0.05), and are different in statistics; the diastolic pressure(experimental group vs. control group: 84.98±10.89 vs 87.27.±12.01) is not decreased singnificanty(P>0.05),and there is no difference in statisticsComparing the two groups in 28 days after treatment, the average arterial pressure(experimental group vs control group.: 100.98±12.12 vs 105.48±12.01) and systolic pressure(experimental group vs control group.: 134.26±12.08 vs 141.72±12.26) are reduced(P<0.05), and are different in statistics; the diastolic pressure(experimental group vs. control group: 83.02.±10.76 vs 85.37±11.52) is not decreased significantly(P>0.05), and there is no difference in statistics.3. For patients who suffer from the Chronic Kidney Disease at 3~4 Stage and Hypertension at Grade-1~2, the therapy of Auricular Point Pressing with Bean can lower patients' blood pressure efficiently on the basis of regular antihypertensive treatment, and the therapeutic effects show a trend of increasing with the passage of time.Conclusion:The Auricular Point Pressing with Bean has a certain auxiliary depressurization effect on patients who suffer from the chronic kidney disease at 3~4 stage and hypertension at grade-1~2. It can achieve the ideal effect of depressurization after 3 days of treatment, and the depressurizing range of systolic pressure is larger than that of diastolic pressure. Moreover, the blood pressure will remain at a fairly stable level within 28 days after treatment.